Re: New mentors for Taverna?

2016-02-15 Thread Stian Soiland-Reyes
No, we are still hoping for a new mentor.. On 14 Feb 2016 17:13, "John D. Ament" wrote: > Just wondering, has anyone stepped up to help Taverna? > > John > > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 6:56 AM Andy Seaborne wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm one of the "semi-active mentors" of Taverna. In my case, I h

Single person developed project

2016-02-15 Thread Amareshwari Sriramdasu
Hi all, Wanted to know if a single person developed project can get incubated in Apache. Any doc links would be helpful as well. Thanks Amareshwari

[VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 4)

2016-02-15 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi all, I submit Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating release to your vote (take 4, new tentative fixing NOTICE file). A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with +1s. Vote thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-unomi-dev/201602.mbox/%3C56B8CCFE.5080307%40nanthr

Re: Single person developed project

2016-02-15 Thread dsh
Hi Amareshwari, please have a look at the Apache Incubator Proposal Guide [1]. Under the section "Community" [2] you'll find the following statement: "Apache is interested only in communities." Does this answer your question? [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html [2] http://incub

[ANNOUNCE] Apache SystemML 0.9.0-incubating released

2016-02-15 Thread Luciano Resende
The Apache SystemML team is pleased to announce the release of Apache SystemML version 0.9.0-incubating. This is the first release as an Apache project. Apache SystemML provides declarative large-scale machine learning (ML) that aims at flexible specification of ML algorithms and automatic generat

[RESULT][VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.1-incubating Release

2016-02-15 Thread Stephen Mallette
The vote for releasing Apache TinkerPop 3.1.1-incubating passed with 3 binding +1s, 0 non-binding +1s, and no 0 or -1. Binding +1s: Daniel Gruno Sergio Fernández Justin Mclean Thanks to those who were able to take the time to vote. Stephen On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:

Re: Release dependant on LGPL

2016-02-15 Thread Luciano Resende
Apache Toree had a similar issue, and we have discussed this in legal-discuss, and here is the feedback from Jim, VP of Legal http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201602.mbox/%3C2A8B931C-1AD6-4230-B2DE-0B33361B3A2B%40jaguNET.com%3E On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 8:46 PM, Greg Ste

Re: Release dependant on LGPL

2016-02-15 Thread Marvin Humphrey
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Luciano Resende wrote: > Apache Toree had a similar issue, and we have discussed this in > legal-discuss, and here is the feedback from Jim, VP of Legal > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201602.mbox/%3C2A8B931C-1AD6-4230-B2DE-0B33361B3A

Re: Release dependant on LGPL

2016-02-15 Thread Craig Russell
I agree that an incubating release does not need to be fully compliant with the proscription against mandatory LGPL dependencies for Apache releases. Clearly the podling is well aware of the need to replace the LGPL dependency before graduation. And I agree with Greg that a podling learning the

[DISCUSS] Quarks proposal

2016-02-15 Thread Katherine Marsden
Find below a draft proposal for a new incubator project, Quarks for discussion. Quarks is seeking experienced mentors as well as contributors to the project. Please discuss and provide feedback. The proposal is also available on the Wiki at https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/QuarksProposal <

Re: [DISCUSS] Quarks proposal

2016-02-15 Thread Katherine Marsden
On 2/15/2016 4:59 PM, Katherine Marsden wrote: Find below a draft proposal for a new incubator project, Quarks for discussion. Quarks is seeking experienced mentors as well as contributors to the project. Please discuss and provide feedback. The proposal is also available on the Wiki at htt

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 2)

2016-02-15 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, +1 binding I checked: - incubating in file name - hashes and signatures good - DISCLAIMER exits - Source LICENSE good (although the short form of the license is prefered) [1] - Source NOICE has a little bit of extra info in it - there's no need to mention MIT software [1] - No unexpected bin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 2)

2016-02-15 Thread Justin Mclean
HI, Sorry I posted to the wrong vote thread I’ll repost to the correct one. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 4)

2016-02-15 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, +1 binding I checked: - incubating in file name - hashes and signatures good - DISCLAIMER exits - Source LICENSE good (although the short form of the license is prefered) [1] - Source NOICE has a little bit of extra info in it - there's no need to mention MIT software [1] - No unexpected bin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 4)

2016-02-15 Thread Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Hi Justin, thanks for this awesome review ! We gonna improve with your comments. Thanks again, Regards JB On 02/16/2016 07:10 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: Hi, +1 binding I checked: - incubating in file name - hashes and signatures good - DISCLAIMER exits - Source LICENSE good (although the shor

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating (take 4)

2016-02-15 Thread Justin Mclean
HI, > thanks for this awesome review ! No problem, binaries with than many jars are hard to get right. Hopefully none of the jars with jars inside than have more jars inside them :-) I did’t take a huge amount of care so made of made a mistake or two - just trying to find the obvious issues. I

Re: Single person developed project

2016-02-15 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
Hi, On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Amareshwari Sriramdasu wrote: > ...Wanted to know if a single person developed project can get incubated in > Apache You need a community, even a minimal one, to enter incubation. Best is to get people interested elsewhere first. Our maturity model [1] c